112 



text of his paper Prof. Cockerell savs that these slides Avere 

 identified by Mr. T. Pergandi. Evidently, then, Prof. Cock- 

 erell did not question the identifications, which were, to all 

 appearances, erroneous. 



Prof. Cockerell speaks of saccliari as having 7 segmented 

 antennae. Maxwell-Lefroy, says under saccharP "Described 

 from Trinidad on sugar cane. A similar species occurs in Bar- 

 bados having one point of difference from the Trinidad speci- 

 mens: the latter are described as having Y-jointed antennae, 

 Avhich appear 6-jointed owing to the lack of division between 

 joints 2 and 3. Barbados specimens have this character, but 

 joint 3 may also have a division, making the antennae 8-jointed." 

 In our material the antennal joints of calceolariae vary consid- 

 erably in the number of joints ; soine are Y- jointed, others have 

 one antenna 7-jointed, the other 8-jointed. "\^Tierever there are 

 but 7 joints, one (usually 4) or two of them are unusually long. 



In the absence of the original description of saccliari our de- 

 termination was based on Prof. Cockerell's measurements of cal- 

 ceolariae, which I believe has been misidentified for saccliari. 



As will be noticed in the table of leg measurements, I had 

 the privilege of examining a slide in Mr. Ehrhorn's collection, 

 which is rather interesting. The material for this slide was col- 

 lected on "NTew Zealand flax in Berkeley, California. P. calceo- 

 lariae having been reported on that plant in Xew Zealand, Mr. 

 Ehrhorn took it for that species. But its correspondence to 

 saccliari seems to be far closer than to the other species, and I 

 should therefore put it down as saccliari. 



Aspidiotus cyanophyll Sign. (Coccidae) on Sugar Cane. 



BY JACOB KOT]NSKY. 



Mr. Swezey called my attention to what T later identified 

 as the above on sugar cane. These canes were growing in an 

 ant-proof insectary, and were started, I believe, from cuttings; 

 the scales were on leaves, f^nless these insects were there pre- 

 viously on the stalk or bud, they must have been blown in there 

 by the wind from an adjacent tree infested with them. 



s Loc. cit. 



Proc. Haw. Ent. Soc. II, No. 3, May, 1910. 



